U.P. Tenancy Act, 2021 Has Overriding Effect — Court Fee on Rent Revision Not Same as Recovery of Possession: Allahabad High Court

“Applications Under Section 10 Are for Rent Determination, Not Eviction — Fee Must Be as Per Section 39(3) of the 2021 Act,”  In a significant judgment clarifying the interpretation of the Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021, the Allahabad High Court held that applications filed for determination of rent under Section 10(1) of the 2021 Act cannot be treated as suits for recovery of possession and therefore cannot attract the higher court fee prescribed under Section 7(xi-b) of the Court Fees Act, 1870.

Justice Neeraj Tiwari, deciding Alok Kumar Jain v. Indra Bhushan Sawhney (Matters under Article 227 No. 4383 of 2024), ruled that the Rent Authority at Agra erred in demanding ₹4,69,983 as court fee by applying the wrong statutory provision. The Court held that Section 39(3) of the 2021 Act, read with Schedule-II Item No. 1-b of the Court Fees Act, governs such proceedings.

“An application under Section 10(1) pertains to determination of revised rent, not recovery of possession. Therefore, court fee shall be levied as applicable to interlocutory applications in a Civil Court under Schedule-II Item No. 1-b of the Court Fees Act, 1870,” the Court observed.

“Special Law Prevails Over General Law — 2021 Tenancy Act Overrides Inconsistent Provisions of the Court Fees Act”

Relying upon Section 42 of the 2021 Act, Justice Tiwari emphasized the overriding effect of the special tenancy legislation over the general provisions of the Court Fees Act, 1870.

“Section 42 of Act No. 16 of 2021 clearly provides that the provisions of this Act shall prevail over any other law inconsistent with it. Hence, for all tenancy disputes governed by this Act, the computation of court fees must be made strictly in accordance with Section 39,” the Court held.

It was further clarified that the Court Fees Act, 1870 continues to apply only to the extent it is not inconsistent with the 2021 Act. Therefore, Section 7(xi-b) applies solely to cases of recovery of possession, while Section 39(3) governs all other categories of applications, including those under Sections 6(4), 6(5), 10, 14(2), 20(2) and 26(3) of the Tenancy Act.

“Court Fees Under Section 39 Divided into Two Distinct Categories”

In an elaborate statutory interpretation, the Court explained that Section 39 of the Tenancy Act classifies applications before the Rent Authority and Rent Tribunal into two distinct categories:

1. Applications for recovery of possession — to be treated as suits between landlord and tenant, attracting fee under Section 7(xi-b) of the Court Fees Act, 1870; and
2. All other applications, including determination or revision of rent — to attract the nominal fee as for interlocutory applications under Schedule-II Item No. 1-b.

Justice Tiwari observed:

“The legislative intent is clear — the insertion of Sections 39(2) and 39(3) was purposeful to draw a distinction between eviction proceedings and other rent-related applications. These provisions cannot be rendered redundant by applying the general law indiscriminately.”

“Execution Proceedings Must Be Concluded Within 30 Days — Rent Authorities Bound by Time Limits”

The Court also directed the Rent Authority, Agra, to recalculate the court fee within two weeks and to dispose of Execution Case No. 127 of 2023 within 30 days, in accordance with Section 36(3) of the 2021 Act.

Justice Tiwari issued a broader directive:

“All Rent Authorities and Rent Tribunals across the State are directed to decide pending applications, appeals, and executions strictly within the time frames provided under Sections 33(2), 35(2), and 36(3) of Act No. 16 of 2021.”

The Court cautioned that statutory deadlines are mandatory, and non-compliance with time-bound provisions defeats the legislative intent of expeditious rent adjudication under the 2021 framework.

“Earlier Orders Found Inconsistent — Matter Remanded for Fresh Calculation”

Setting aside the earlier orders dated 28.05.2024 and 29.05.2024, Justice Tiwari remitted the matter to the Rent Authority, Agra, to reassess the payable court fee “in light of Section 39(3) of Act No.16 of 2021 read with Schedule-II Item No.1-b of the Court Fees Act, 1870,” and directed compliance within two weeks of receiving the certified copy.

“Inconsistent application of general provisions cannot override the specific statutory framework of Act No. 16 of 2021,” the Court reiterated.

“The 2021 Act Is a Complete Code for Tenancy Disputes — Procedural Efficiency and Legal Clarity Must Be Ensured”

Concluding the judgment, Justice Neeraj Tiwari emphasized the importance of procedural compliance and legislative harmony:

“Once a special statute prescribes its own mechanism for fees and timelines, authorities are bound to act within that framework. The U.P. Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021 is a self-contained code, and its procedural mandates must be scrupulously followed to ensure speedy and fair resolution of rent disputes.”

Date of Decision: November 4, 2025